31 ms·

The EU is not working for people as it worked for peace and banks. There is nothing shameful in that, the process is difficult and has so many enemies within an

by DrNuke 8y ago

The EU is not working for people as it worked for peace and banks. There is nothing shameful in that, the process is difficult and has so many enemies within and outside Europe. Italy often acts as a politics lab, let’s see what happens in May 2019 with the general European election in the EU.

mexicanandre 8y ago
I think Italy’s issues are more to do with its government and corruption than the EU. The EU seems to be working for a lot of the other countries just fine economically.
- danieldk 8y ago
  Despite the shortcomings of the EU, national politicians are also using the EU for shifting the blame of their own failings. In the longer term, this undermines trust in the EU and gives rise to populism. That’s not to say that people who vote populist don’t have a point. It’s hard to understand why companies are making billions in profits, while people are scrambling to make ends meet.
  - Applejinx 8y ago
    I would think that was very easy to understand. Unless you are stuck on some axiom that what's good for the companies is good for… humans. I think it's fairly self evident at this point that you've got people, you've got companies, you've got capitalism as a whole. It's a pecking order and they are somewhat to extremely antagonistic. People, as the most powerless entities in the equation, are very much on the way out.
    - Applejinx 8y ago
      You can downvote all you like, but all this is to be expected and is unsurprising. Humans are to these large collective entities or even larger self-organizing entities like political systems, as cells are to humans. There is no reason to assume a humanocentric viewpoint here, and if assuming one leads to continuous dismay and surprise, you've got to widen your perspective and acknowledge higher-order organisms when they're this obvious. It's like a sort of Singularity. Why would it be surprising if we fail to immediately recognize it for what it is?
- alecco 8y ago
  The EU lured all the Mediterranean countries with sudden cheap credit and currency stability. But they didn't think of the consequences. Too cheap credit brings inefficiency and breeds corruption. There was a reason those countries had bad rates before joining. And most of the causes of those issues were swept under the rug. Now who is going to pay for the consequences?
  - tonyedgecombe 8y ago
    If only we could wind the clock back ... But we can't so have to deal with what is in front of us right now.
  - everybodyknows 8y ago
    Okay ... but who is "they"? A few individual, grey-haired heads, filled with the history of similar fiascos, did think of consequences: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_Monetary_Union https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_Monetary_Union But the levers of political power were, then as now, in hands guided not by stale history, but by fresh opportunity for self-advancement.
    - alecco 8y ago
      > but who is "they"? Everyone involved.
- RobertoG 8y ago
  "The EU seems to be working for a lot of the other countries just fine economically." I assume you mean the Euro here (not the EU) What are those countries?
RobertoG 8y ago
The European Union works reasonably well, the problem is with the Euro. Not currency union can work properly without a fiscal union.
- TheOtherHobbes 8y ago
  The EU is still mostly a good thing. The Euro is a disaster - swivel-eyed lunatic neoliberal orthodoxy enforced by a common currency. The irony is that the so-called single market is a mess too. While it's possible to sell across country borders in the EU, the bureaucratic necessities - especially VAT accounting - make it a horror show. Eliminating customs bureaucracy is a good thing, but that's still a long way short of true friction-free trade.
  - toyg 8y ago
    > the bureaucratic necessities - especially VAT accounting - make it a horror show. EU VAT accounting is actually fabulous for real goods: intra-union transactions are VAT-free, so each state can levy whichever rate they prefer on the final sale. Everyone is happy and there is less red tape. They fucked up for digital goods and services because the model simply does not map well to that domain - the internet has no border. Politicians felt they had to make a choice between losing VAT income altogether (which is what was happening before, with companies tactically exploiting low-VAT countries) or creating some friction for digital businesses. They picked the most rational option. In reality, it's a false dichotomy, and everyone knows it. The real way out is a simplification where that tax is centralized at federal level; but it requires a huge amount of political capital, that the current generation of European politicians is completely incapable of generating on their own. At some point, someone will run in France or Germany on this platform of simple, flat VAT rates on digital income across the EU, accumulating to an unified EU treasury that can then be used to further generate income; they will win, and it will come to pass.
alecco 8y ago
The EU is overgrown from mild benevolent rules unifying member countries on similar traits to a massive body of law and power that nobody knows. I used to be quite against Brexit but after seeing on of the videos on the EU I am now skeptical. There are 3 big voting bodies: EU Council, EU Parliament, and EU comission. The majority of people don't know the difference and nobody knows the people in there. In the last decade they started micro-managing everything in the EU. Think of gdpr and the new copyright rules. It's starting to resemble a big authoritarian state. Also they apply uniformly the same strategy for countries like Germany/Austria/Netherlands and Greece/Portugal/Italy when they are in very different situations. The former are quite happy with the arrangement, the latter are trapped in a death spiral.
- pavlov 8y ago
  > ”There are 3 big voting bodies: EU Council, EU Parliament, and EU comission. The majority of people don't know the difference and nobody knows the people in there.” As a pro-Brexit argument, this seems weak. I think most people can’t explain the difference between the House of Commons, the House of Lords and the Cabinet either. The EU structure really isn’t that complex when you remember that its power is granted by the member states, so the highest authority is an oversight body consisting of each country’s elected governments — that’s the EU council. The Commission is the executive branch and the Parliament is legislative. That’s it.
  - tomp 8y ago
    The difference is that the House of Commons elects the Cabinet; not so in the EU (that's IMO where half of the problem is coming from). In the future, when we're setting up even larger multinational organisations (even a world government), EU will be a good example of what not to do.
    - kazen44 8y ago
      Except that this is simply not true, the head of the european comission is elected through the EU parlement, and the rest is appointed by the council of ministers. (which are appointed by the national elections of each member state). People should stop comparing the EU to any other national system, because it is inherently an supranational and intergovermental system.

by DrNuke 8y ago

mexicanandre 8y ago

I think Italy’s issues are more to do with its government and corruption than the EU. The EU seems to be working for a lot of the other countries just fine economically.

danieldk 8y ago
Despite the shortcomings of the EU, national politicians are also using the EU for shifting the blame of their own failings. In the longer term, this undermines trust in the EU and gives rise to populism. That’s not to say that people who vote populist don’t have a point. It’s hard to understand why companies are making billions in profits, while people are scrambling to make ends meet.
- Applejinx 8y ago
  I would think that was very easy to understand. Unless you are stuck on some axiom that what's good for the companies is good for… humans. I think it's fairly self evident at this point that you've got people, you've got companies, you've got capitalism as a whole. It's a pecking order and they are somewhat to extremely antagonistic. People, as the most powerless entities in the equation, are very much on the way out.
  - Applejinx 8y ago
    You can downvote all you like, but all this is to be expected and is unsurprising. Humans are to these large collective entities or even larger self-organizing entities like political systems, as cells are to humans. There is no reason to assume a humanocentric viewpoint here, and if assuming one leads to continuous dismay and surprise, you've got to widen your perspective and acknowledge higher-order organisms when they're this obvious. It's like a sort of Singularity. Why would it be surprising if we fail to immediately recognize it for what it is?
alecco 8y ago
The EU lured all the Mediterranean countries with sudden cheap credit and currency stability. But they didn't think of the consequences. Too cheap credit brings inefficiency and breeds corruption. There was a reason those countries had bad rates before joining. And most of the causes of those issues were swept under the rug. Now who is going to pay for the consequences?
- tonyedgecombe 8y ago
  If only we could wind the clock back ... But we can't so have to deal with what is in front of us right now.
- everybodyknows 8y ago
  Okay ... but who is "they"? A few individual, grey-haired heads, filled with the history of similar fiascos, did think of consequences: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_Monetary_Union https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_Monetary_Union But the levers of political power were, then as now, in hands guided not by stale history, but by fresh opportunity for self-advancement.
  - alecco 8y ago
    > but who is "they"? Everyone involved.
RobertoG 8y ago
"The EU seems to be working for a lot of the other countries just fine economically." I assume you mean the Euro here (not the EU) What are those countries?

RobertoG 8y ago

The European Union works reasonably well, the problem is with the Euro. Not currency union can work properly without a fiscal union.

TheOtherHobbes 8y ago
The EU is still mostly a good thing. The Euro is a disaster - swivel-eyed lunatic neoliberal orthodoxy enforced by a common currency. The irony is that the so-called single market is a mess too. While it's possible to sell across country borders in the EU, the bureaucratic necessities - especially VAT accounting - make it a horror show. Eliminating customs bureaucracy is a good thing, but that's still a long way short of true friction-free trade.
- toyg 8y ago
  > the bureaucratic necessities - especially VAT accounting - make it a horror show. EU VAT accounting is actually fabulous for real goods: intra-union transactions are VAT-free, so each state can levy whichever rate they prefer on the final sale. Everyone is happy and there is less red tape. They fucked up for digital goods and services because the model simply does not map well to that domain - the internet has no border. Politicians felt they had to make a choice between losing VAT income altogether (which is what was happening before, with companies tactically exploiting low-VAT countries) or creating some friction for digital businesses. They picked the most rational option. In reality, it's a false dichotomy, and everyone knows it. The real way out is a simplification where that tax is centralized at federal level; but it requires a huge amount of political capital, that the current generation of European politicians is completely incapable of generating on their own. At some point, someone will run in France or Germany on this platform of simple, flat VAT rates on digital income across the EU, accumulating to an unified EU treasury that can then be used to further generate income; they will win, and it will come to pass.

alecco 8y ago

The EU is overgrown from mild benevolent rules unifying member countries on similar traits to a massive body of law and power that nobody knows. I used to be quite against Brexit but after seeing on of the videos on the EU I am now skeptical. There are 3 big voting bodies: EU Council, EU Parliament, and EU comission. The majority of people don't know the difference and nobody knows the people in there. In the last decade they started micro-managing everything in the EU. Think of gdpr and the new copyright rules. It's starting to resemble a big authoritarian state. Also they apply uniformly the same strategy for countries like Germany/Austria/Netherlands and Greece/Portugal/Italy when they are in very different situations. The former are quite happy with the arrangement, the latter are trapped in a death spiral.

pavlov 8y ago
> ”There are 3 big voting bodies: EU Council, EU Parliament, and EU comission. The majority of people don't know the difference and nobody knows the people in there.” As a pro-Brexit argument, this seems weak. I think most people can’t explain the difference between the House of Commons, the House of Lords and the Cabinet either. The EU structure really isn’t that complex when you remember that its power is granted by the member states, so the highest authority is an oversight body consisting of each country’s elected governments — that’s the EU council. The Commission is the executive branch and the Parliament is legislative. That’s it.
- tomp 8y ago
  The difference is that the House of Commons elects the Cabinet; not so in the EU (that's IMO where half of the problem is coming from). In the future, when we're setting up even larger multinational organisations (even a world government), EU will be a good example of what not to do.
  - kazen44 8y ago
    Except that this is simply not true, the head of the european comission is elected through the EU parlement, and the rest is appointed by the council of ministers. (which are appointed by the national elections of each member state). People should stop comparing the EU to any other national system, because it is inherently an supranational and intergovermental system.